Re: [EXTERNAL]Vaux BOD - 3 Questions in need of legal advice
Paul Block
Take a look at Jason’s bubble chart — there was negligence, so 223 & 232 pay everything UP TO the Association deductible, and then Association insurance rules. When that happens, we have to decide on how to make payment: via claim or out of our pocket. It’s pretty clear, and Jason’s advice is in, but if you don’t want to see it this way, so be it. — Hal
From: Paul Block <bloc...@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 4, 2026 1:07 PM
To: wor...@finitearts.com
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL]Vaux BOD - 3 Questions in need of legal advice
Thanks Hal, but I don’t read it that way. Maybe I’m just totally confused. I read that the law section 100.530 says that if the unit owners negligence is responsible for damage to more units than its own, that unit is responsible for covering the costs. Am I the only one that reads it that way?
-paul
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 3, 2026, at 4:07 PM, wor...@finitearts.com wrote:
Hi again — Jason answered more than one question. The underlying bylaws, cited by him, is section 5.7. Since our insurance covers unit owners, we’re obliged to cover them when their insurance maxes out at our Association deductible.
What I want to do:
• Pay for the amount 223 & 232 owe above our deductible; (I understand the amount is approx. $5,000 total)
• Decide whether we want to make a claim to our insurance company;
• Consider upping our Association deductible to avoid what just happened in the future
• Very strongly urge Kin to find an alternative to Charter in cases like these.
— Hal
From: Paul Block <bloc...@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, July 3, 2026 11:57 AM
To: wor...@finitearts.com
Subject: Re: FW: [EXTERNAL]Vaux BOD - 3 Questions in need of legal advice
I may be reading it wrongly, and I will read it again, but it looks like this is for the storage units, not the leak. And, complex as it may be, it looks like the storage unit owners are responsible, through their insurance, to pay for repairs.
Like I said, I will read it again...and again.
-paul
On Fri, Jul 3, 2026 at 11:12 AM <wor...@finitearts.com> wrote:
Hi, Paul — here’s Jason’s response to our questions from last Thursday . . . even he sees this as complex. — Hal
From: Jason L. Grosz <j...@vf-law.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2026 2:19 PM
To: wor...@finitearts.com
Cc: 'Paul Block' <bloc...@gmail.com>; 'Tim Ackley' <tim.ack...@gmail.com>; 'Joe Mack' <jmmc...@gmail.com>; 'DIANA DREW-FLEMING' <ddrewf...@icloud.com>; Kesarah Rhine <Kesara...@vf-law.com>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL]Vaux BOD - 3 Questions in need of legal advice
Hal – some answers/discussion in response to your questions. Liability for damages and insurance coverage is devilishly complex in a condominium association. So much so that I recently taught an hourlong class with an insurance broker on the subject. Any time there is damage (whether caused by an owner, trespasser or “act of god”) there is an analysis I run through:
- Is it covered by insurance?
- If not covered by insurance – who has maintenance responsibility for that item?
- Was the owner or the association negligent?
I actually have a handout from the class I taught which is sort of a decision-tree view of the analysis I apply in these situations. I have attached that as I think it will be helpful to our discussion on Items #1 and #2.
1. Who pays for damage to a storage unit caused by an intruder?
> The Declaration (4.3.3) defines ownership of the storage units to be inside the physical enclosure.
> Our Bylaws (8.1.1) say owners must pay for all repairs
> Vaux use case from the past was: yup, owners paid
Short Answer: most likely the owner or their insurance company if the damage is above the deductible on their condominium unit owner (HO-6) policy.
Longer Answer:
First question is how much damage was caused and what will it cost to repair? Storage units are “units”. So they are covered by the Association master policy – but only above a really high deductible (like $25k-$50k depending on your policy). Below that – they are covered by the individual unit owner’s policy. Those unit owner policies have much lower deductibles – typically $500-$2500.
If there is no insurance coverage on either the master policy or the HO-6 policy – then it would be the owner’s responsibility to repair the damage because that is part of their unit and owners are responsible for their units.
The only thing that could vary that answer would be if the Association were somehow negligent in allowing the intruder to break in.
So realistically – if there is no insurance coverage – we fall back on the basic delineation of maintenance responsibility in the governing documents.
In this instance, the maintenance responsibility for repairs is mixed. The owner is responsible for the interior of the storage unit plus the door, and the association is responsible for the exterior of the Storage Unit, except for the door.
Bylaws Maintenance provision provides:
<img001.png>
However, Association must repair the exterior surfaces (except for the door) of each Storage Unit:
<img002.png>
The Declaration defines Storage Unit as follows:
1.1.21 Storage Unit shall mean the part of the Condominium designated as such in Section 4 and comprised of the space enclosed by its boundaries as described in Section 4.
The Storage Units are bounded by the following:
<img003.png>
Therefore, the Owner is responsible for the interior of the storage unit plus the door, and the Association is responsible for the exterior of the Storage Unit, except for the door. But if there is insurance coverage (likely on the owner’s policy) then they might be able to file a claim to get some of the repairs covered.
2. What is the overview meaning of provisions in our governing documents that talk about owner liability for damages up to the Association insurance deductible? Why would the Association ever be on the hook for damages confined to individual units?
> We have a present situation where an owner left water running that caused damage in the unit below.
- no common areas were affected
- the cost of the leak exceeds the Association insurance deductible
- our property manager asserts that the Association must make up repair costs related to the deductible
- Why isn't the cost entirely the responsibility of the negligent owner?
It sounds counterintuitive – but Condominium associations like the Vaux purchase a master insurance policy that covers both the common elements and the units. But this policy provides coverage over a high deductible (often 25k-50k). In the case of the Vaux, the bylaws require this:
<img004.png>
Then the individual owners purchase a condominium unit owner’s policy that covers their unit and has “loss assessment coverage” which will cover the assessment of the deductible charged to the unit if there is a claim on the master policy:
<img005.png>
What’s more, the condominium Act actually contemplates this. It allows Boards like yours to adopt an insurance resolution allocating responsibility for deductibles on the master policy:
100.435 Insurance for individual units and common elements; fidelity bond.
* * *
(6) If the declaration or bylaws of a condominium created before September 27, 2007, do not assign the responsibility for payment of the amount of the deductible in an association insurance policy, the board of directors may adopt a resolution that assigns the responsibility for payment of the amount of the deductible. The resolution must include, but need not be limited to:
(a) The circumstances under which the deductible will be charged against:
(A) A unit owner or the unit owners affected by a loss; or
(B) All unit owners;
(b) The allocation of the deductible charged under paragraph (a) of this subsection; and
(c) If a unit owner and the association have duplicate insurance coverage, the insurance policy that is primary, unless otherwise provided in the declaration or bylaws.
So, what is contemplated here is that owners should be purchasing insurance up to the Master Policy deductible and covering the master policy deductible in the event of a claim that is big enough to trigger master policy coverage.
Now the second part of your question – was why would the Association ever be liable for damages within the confines of a unit? The simple answer is that would be exceedingly rare. The more complex answer goes back to the analysis I discussed above and in the handout:
- Is it covered by insurance?
- If not covered by insurance – who has maintenance responsibility for that item?
- Was the owner or the association negligent?
There are some rare situations where either the owner or the Association was negligent where that negligence requires the negligent party to pay for damage that would otherwise be the maintenance responsibility of the other party.
Classic example is a lady living in the unit who turns her sink on, then leaves on a 4 hour walk with her dog forgetting to turn the sink off. Water cascades down two stories and there is a significant water loss. In that scenario – the owner was negligent. If insurance covers it – we can charge them the entire deductible. If insurance doesn’t – we can charge them the entire repair cost because they were negligent. There is a statute on this too:
100.530 Allocation of common profits and expenses; liability of unit owner; limitation on assessments against declarant; deferral of assessments by declarant.
* * *
(6) If the board of directors determines that any loss or cost incurred by the association is the fault of one or more owners, the association may, after notice and an opportunity for a hearing before the board of directors, assess the amount of the loss or cost exclusively against the units of the responsible owners.
Another classic example is an owner falling asleep with a lit cigarette which causes a fire…
But the same could be true in the reverse. Let’s say we have a persistent roof leak. The roof is a common element. We know it’s leaking and causing interior drywall repairs. Yet we haven’t fixed the roof. In that scenario the Association was negligent in failing to maintain a common element. An owner (the third owner) complains of interior damage to their unit. But it’s just drywall damage (under their unit owner policy deductible. In that scenario – the Association was negligent and would have to pay for interior damage to a unit even though drywall would typically be the owner’s maintenance responsibility.
3. We require that The Vaux Association hold the contracts for construction in our garage on behalf of an owner.
> should we do the same for owners who want to replace their HVAC equipment on our roofs?
Bylaws Section 8.3 permits this. It is a good way to protect the roof and help prevent damage, leaks, and other problems that may arise during or after the work is completed.
<img006.png>
Jason L. Grosz| Attorney
VF Law
6000 Meadows Road, Suite 500 | Lake Oswego, OR 97035
Main: 503.684.4111 | Direct: 503.210.3091 | Fax: 503.905.2557
Email: j...@vf-law.com | Website: www.vf-law.com
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or privileged information. If you have received this message by mistake, please do not review, disclose, copy, or distribute the e-mail. Instead, please notify us immediately by replying to this message or telephoning us. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply at j...@vf-law.com and delete the message.
Tax Advice Notice: IRS Circular 230 requires us to advise you that, if this communication or any attachment contains any tax advice, the advice is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding federal tax penalties. A taxpayer may rely on professional advice to avoid federal tax penalties only if the advice is reflected in a comprehensive tax opinion that conforms to stringent requirements.
FDCPA Notice: This communication is from a debt collector attempting to collect a debt. Any information obtained will be used for that purpose. Reply “Stop Email Communication” to opt out of further email communication.
From: wor...@finitearts.com <wor...@finitearts.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2026 4:20 PM
To: Jason L. Grosz <j...@vf-law.com>
Cc: 'Paul Block' <bloc...@gmail.com>; 'Tim Ackley' <tim.ack...@gmail.com>; 'Joe Mack' <jmmc...@gmail.com>; 'DIANA DREW-FLEMING' <ddrewf...@icloud.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL]Vaux BOD - 3 Questions in need of legal advice
Hello, Jason —
Here are three legal questions puzzling The Vaux Board of Directors, and we need your advice on each . . .
1. Who pays for damage to a storage unit caused by an intruder?
> The Declaration (4.3.3) defines ownership of the storage units to be inside the physical enclosure.
> Our Bylaws (8.1.1) say owners must pay for all repairs
> Vaux use case from the past was: yup, owners paid
2. What is the overview meaning of provisions in our governing documents that talk about owner liability for damages up to the Association insurance deductible? Why would the Association ever be on the hook for damages confined to individual units?
> We have a present situation where an owner left water running that caused damage in the unit below.
- no common areas were affected
- the cost of the leak exceeds the Association insurance deductible
- our property manager asserts that the Association must make up repair costs related to the deductible
- Why isn't the cost entirely the responsibility of the negligent owner?
3. We require that The Vaux Association hold the contracts for construction in our garage on behalf of an owner.
> should we do the same for owners who want to replace their HVAC equipment on our roofs?
I'm enclosing sections of our governing dox and all of our insurance resolution with my inquiry.
All best,
— Hal
(for The Vaux BOD)
Paul Block
To the Board: do you understand, from Jason's answer, who pays what for the leak from Unit 232 that, due to negligence, caused damage in Unit 132.and the law behind any answer he might have given?
DIANA DREW-FLEMING
--
Officers of The Vaux
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vauxofficers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vauxofficers...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vauxofficers/CAArw8pKa%2B%2BiNu64ZW0wjhQepHrEB3nkxaA4rDWa1UN8ik%2B41oA%40mail.gmail.com.
Joe Mack
--
Officers of The Vaux
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vauxofficers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vauxofficers...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vauxofficers/CAArw8pL%2BtAb-nZsO9vA%2BbdW2zTW2PneXCxwrQs-28MRaY5pzwQ%40mail.gmail.com.
DIANA DREW-FLEMING
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vauxofficers/CANX6OJTkNUk76UTrCv0jp1KKk21FdgfcgENZOMKhjccbO16r8g%40mail.gmail.com.
Tim Ackley
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vauxofficers/5F7D2C82-A995-4D97-9D24-80B5FCB5A5B3%40icloud.com.